This week the CBC reported that earlier this month the Nova Scotia government has been served with a notice from local vaping merchants that they are asking that province's courts to strike down certain vaping regulations. The argument they will present to the court is that sections of the Tobacco Access Act violate the human rights of vapers.
This lawsuit was no surprise. Since late winter, GOFUNDME campaigns had been underway to raise money for this endeavour. The first campaign raised $38,000, and the second raised $107,000.
Nor is this the first constitutional challenge to provincial restrictions on vaping products.
In the spring of 2016, the Quebec government faced similar challenges from the Quebec Vaping Association (L'association Québécoise des vapoteries) and the Canadian Vaping Association. Those groups claimed that sections of the Quebec Tobacco Control Act, which had been adopted in November 2015, were in conflict with rights protected under the Quebec and Canadian Charters of Rights.
And it may not be the last! British Columbia's strict regulations, some of which come into force this week, have also been accused of being contrary to Canada's Charter.
This post presents a brief overview of these legal claims, and of the court decisions to date.
NOVA SCOTIA
The regulations
In 2020, Nova Scotia put in place three major changes to its vaping controls:
- Effective April 1, the ban on flavours in tobacco products was extended to vaping products. This regulation was adopted in December 2019.
- Effective September 1, the amount of nicotine that could be included in vaping liquids was limited to not more than 20 mg. This regulation was adopted in May 2020, following amendments to the enabling legislation that were adopted in March.
- Effective September 15, vaping liquids are subject to a $0.50/ml tax, and vaping devices subject to a 20% ad valorem tax. These measures were included in the February 2020 budget, and were adopted by the legislature in March, 2020.
Cloud Factory Dartmouth Location |
Notice of the legal challenge to these measures was filed on September 8, 2020 by Halifax lawyer Michael Scott of Patterson Law on behalf of the Cloud Factory Vape Shop and its part-owner Edward MacEachern. This store does not appear to be a large commercial undertaking, with a small number of outlets located in strip malls in Dartmouth and Fall River, Nova Scotia.
This document advises the government that the court will be asked to:
- strike down those sections of the Tobacco Access Act which ban the sale of flavoured e-cigaretets (s. 3(e), 3(ba) and 7)
- strike down those sections of the Smoke-Free Places Act which ban using vaping products in retail stores (s. 5(a)(j)).
- strike down those sections of the Revenue Act which impose a tax on vaping liquids (s. 46C-E)
- Does Quebec have a right to legislate in this area when the federal government has adopted different measures?
- Do restrictions on advertising vaping products infringe the right to security of the person and right to expression provided for in the Canadian and Quebec Charter of Rights and Freedoms?
- Do prohibitions on trying vaping products in specialty stores infringe the right to security of the person provided for in the Canadian and Quebec Charters?
- The federal Tobacco and Vaping Products Act does not preclude Quebec from passing its own restrictions in vaping marketing, and the two laws are not incompatible with each other.
- Most aspects of the Quebec law do not infringe Charter rights to the security of the person.
- The restriction on allowing people to try the product in stores did limit the rights of vapers to security of the person and there was no justification for this infringement. (Justice Dumais struck down s. 2(1) and 2(12) of the Tobacco Control Act)
- Those provisions of the Quebec law which prohibited advertising vaping products to smokers as a cessation device were also an infringement of expression rights under the Charters, and the infringement was not justified. (He struck down s. 24(4, 8, 9 and paragraph 3 of the Tobacco Control Act and s 6.4(2) of regulations under that act).